Request your free, three-month trial to Tabletalk magazine. You’ll receive the print issue monthly and gain immediate digital access to decades of archives. This trial is risk-free. No credit card required.
Try Tabletalk NowAlready receive Tabletalk magazine every month?
Verify your email address to gain unlimited access.
walked into the coffee shop, feeling slightly irritated. The internet had gone out at the church building, and my work that afternoon required a connection. So there I was, standing in line to buy a cup of coffee for the sole purpose of accessing Wi-Fi. But as I looked around, it occurred to me that every single table was occupied. The only vacant seats were two chairs in a rather tight corner by the window. I quickly got out of line to throw my bag on one of the chairs. But as I did, I caught a look of frustration on the face of a man in line. It was apparent that he had planned to sit there. I approached him and somewhat awkwardly apologized, telling him that I would be happy to share the corner with him, since there were two chairs. To my surprise, he took me up on the offer, and a conversation began to unfold that has turned into a long-term friendship.
Jim (not his real name) is an agnostic, but he is very open to discussing spiritual matters. We’ve gotten lunch on a handful of occasions since that initial coffee-shop encounter, and every time we have a robust conversation wherein the claims of Christ are presented—and he denies them. Yet despite the spiritual antithesis between us, we depart with a hug as friends.
How can there be harmony where God has promised enmity (Gen. 3:15)? My conviction is that it is the prayerful outworking of the Apostolic command, “If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all” (Rom. 12:18).
We might initially think the “all” is referring to “all believers.” But the immediate context makes clear that the “all” is much more comprehensive, entailing all humanity—whether in Adam or in Christ. That is why it is sandwiched between exhortations not to curse your enemy who persecutes you (vv. 14, 19–21). God calls us to seek, as far as we possibly can, to live at peace—even with our unbelieving neighbors who are at war with God and often at war with us because of our identification with God.
So what does it look like to be bold with the gospel while also pursuing harmony with those who reject it?
engage your shared humanity
While I’ve never experienced divorce like Jim, both of us desire a healthy marriage and are passionate about raising our kids right. Our conversations often turn to these themes, organically shifting from the relational and practical to the philosophical, as I’ve sought to understand how Jim’s religious skepticism can account for the longings of his heart. I’m convinced that it can’t.
Without God, what is marriage but a social construct that can be flippantly broken when it doesn’t serve your desires? Without God, why give yourself to the incredibly inconvenient and expensive work of raising kids? These are questions that Jim can’t adequately answer. But I’ve been able to share with him how the triune God can make sense of his internal yearnings. For He has designed both marriage and family to serve as creaturely pictures of the relationship that He created us to enjoy with Himself. Jim’s longing for a faithful marriage and a fruitful family is, at its root, a longing for God—to whom he can be reconciled only through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The gospel has been woven into loving conversations centered on our shared humanity, not haphazardly tacked on to a bit of small talk.
engage face-to-face over food
One look at social media and you might think that the Apostle commanded, “If possible, so far as it depends on you, live at war with all.” It has become a badge of honor to be a culture warrior and to be at everyone’s throats in the cause of God’s truth. It’s as if Paul’s words “Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt” (Col. 4:6) actually read, “Let your speech always be pugnacious, seasoned with sass.” Had I approached Jim this way—or any of my unbelieving neighbors, for that matter—I guarantee that I would have forfeited the opportunity for friendship and the ongoing open doors for the gospel that have come through it. Digital communication, especially social media, fosters polarization. That is why, apart from text messages to arrange our meetings, Jim and I only speak face-to-face, and always over a good meal. Food has a way of calming nerves and binding us together, and flesh-and-blood presence has a way of preventing rash statements, misunderstandings, and overreactions.
engage the conflict where it really matters
Jim and I disagree on many things (more than I probably even know). At times, politics has come up in conversation. I’m not afraid to go there—especially when it comes to moral and theological issues that have become politicized—but I’ve had to remind myself that it matters little if I move him in a certain political direction. The primary thing is for Jim to know, love, and follow Jesus Christ, not vote for a particular political candidate. There are any number of things that we could debate, but I’ve sought to avoid all unnecessary contentious issues so that we might save our conflict for the most fundamental clash as the gospel goes forth—in the hope that the enmity between us might be removed as Jim comes to know peace with God through faith in Jesus Christ.
The reason that we must take great pains to live at peace with all is that the gospel of peace might turn our spiritual enemies into brothers and sisters in Christ. So we are bold for truth even while gentle, loving, and peace-promoting in demeanor, praying that the God of peace would use our witness to reconcile our neighbors to Himself.